


W.D. Gaster the Animal Trainer

by ArgentDandelion



Category: Undertale (Video Game)
Genre: Alternate Universe - Handplates (Undertale), Dubious Ethics, Gen, Nonfiction, Pragmatic Villainy, Psychology
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2019-08-28
Updated: 2019-08-28
Packaged: 2020-09-28 16:04:20
Rating: Teen And Up Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 1,066
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/20428667
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/ArgentDandelion/pseuds/ArgentDandelion
Summary: An approach based on Pragmatic Villainy that could plausibly persuade W.D. Gaster of Handplates into minimizing pain and discomfort in his test subjects, with a small chance of breaking his will for cruel experiments entirely.





	W.D. Gaster the Animal Trainer

(Normal People: “What happy skeleton children!”  
Animal Trainer Gaster: “The lab rats are highly cooperative today.”)

Through operant conditioning, animals (and humans) link an action with its consequences. A rat presses a lever and gets food, and so is likely to press the lever again. A human sends a friend funny comics; the friend is delighted, and the human is likely to send more comics.

Animal training is mostly just operant conditioning. While animal training was once largely punishment-based (e.g., lion tamers’ stools and whips) it’s rarely (if ever) used in modern animal training. For one thing, punishment builds distrust, and can lead to animals attacking or killing their trainers. Instead, animal trainers largely encourage (“reinforce”) certain behaviors through pleasant interactions and rewards. In this way, even big, dangerous animals can be trained, and even allow somewhat painful things. (e.g., blood draws)

_Handplates_’ W.D. Gaster really ought to think like an animal trainer.

Of course, his test subjects are not animals; indeed, he’d get the best results if he considered them people and treated them as befitting people. Yet, for multiple reasons (e.g., his deep sense of denial) it would be impossible to persuade him to do that.   
His dehumanizing (or depersonizing?) perspective and wanton cruelty is impractical, counter-productive, and indeed unsafe for him; minimizing his test subjects’ pain and discomfort is really the best idea. Presently, he considers them mere “living tools” or objects for his experiments, but even thinking of them as animals would drastically increase their quality of life, Gaster’s mental health, and his test results.

* * *

## General Testing Procedures

  
Animal Trainer Gaster: “Aw darn, I shouldn’t scare the animal.”

Gaster can get the behaviors he wants through the animal training principles of habituation and shaping. With habituation, he’d familiarize them to parts of each procedure in a comfortable environment until they got used to it. With shaping, he’d break down a desired behavior into steps, and reward getting closer to the desired behavior.

The article’s author (ArgentDandelion) can attest to the effectiveness of habituation: she chose to gave blood after months of watching _Kill la Kill_ (a show where a girl gets superpowered from a sentient uniform sucking her blood with needles), and a week or so on writing an article about the uniform’s needle specifications. (This is the same person who once was terrified of receiving vaccinations, as many are.) While giving blood was entirely voluntary, the author knew how useful it was to minimize her discomfort: she chose a comfortable environment, avoided looking at the blood-drawing tube, and read a fun fantasy book during the hour it took to drain some blood.

Applying shaping would probably be easy. Gaster would probably consider it impractical (or be too impatient) to train them for weeks for just one procedure (e.g., the hand plate drilling), and he couldn’t foresee exactly which experiments or procedures he’d want to do. Thus, when starting their “training”, it would be better to train general behaviors, familiarize them with different kinds of equipment, and begin with simple, painless experiments.

For example, in many experiments, Sans and Papyrus are strapped tightly in to chairs or tables, and Gaster wants them to be quiet, still, and not obviously distressed. (Much like the author during a blood draw, come to think of it.) Using the principle of habituation, he’d let them see and handle the straps, and get used to being strapped in at different levels of tightness. Using shaping, he’d reward them for being mostly quiet and still when strapped down for a minute, and then gradually reward quieter and more still behavior for longer periods.

If these two principles aren’t enough, he could also use counterconditioning. With counterconditioning, he could replace unwanted responses (e.g., panicking) to a stimulus (e.g., the scary noise of a drill, painful levels of poking and pressure) with wanted responses by associating the stimulus with pleasant things. (e.g., food, if he’s going for obviously animal-like reinforcers; praise, as a less likely and less animal-like one)

If the animal training techniques were used properly, his test subjects wouldn’t panic, struggle, or make noise, and might even eagerly cooperate for painful experiments. While using anesthesia or non-painfully padlocking a plate through the ribs is still more practical, his test subjects might even come to tolerate the hand plate-drilling. This isn’t so far-fetched: after all, some people willingly go through the long and painful process of getting a tattoo, and just keep coming back.

* * *

##  **3\. Other Benefits**

**Better Results**

It’s not much of a conceptual leap to treat his test subjects like lab rats, but even that would entail a better environment. Lab rats are most intelligent, as measured by tests, when raised in “enriched environments”—that is, big cages with lots of objects and other rats to interact with. Since Gaster is interested about his test subjects’ intelligence and occasionally gives them IQ tests, it fits his interests to give Sans and Papyrus a more comfortable room and more entertaining activities.

  
He claims he’s losing his ability to heal, but with  
animal training he can have his pain cake and eat it too.

**Healing**

In _Handplates_, healing magic is based on the monster’s capacity for empathy, sympathy and love. One benefit of Gaster treating his test subjects as animals is that it won’t erode his empathy as much as forcing himself to be callous towards them. Thus, he’ll still be able to heal them in emergencies.

##  **4\. Conclusion**

While he’ll still want to avoid acting affectionate towards them (for fear of losing “strength” and “objectivity”), he nonetheless won’t be accustomed to avoiding general “niceness” at all costs and making them suffer unnecessarily. In brief, thinking of them as animals and treating them as such would actually be better for both Gaster and his test subjects.

Of course, the very fact Gaster is experimenting on children is morally questionable, especially since he plans to do so indefinitely and he cannot even tell them what experiments he plans to do before they consent to it. Still, canon Gaster seems to expect condemnation, imprisonment, and even execution for his deeds. Given Asgore’s a big pushover, were Gaster to take reasonable precautions to minimize pain and discomfort he’d probably only be fired from his position for his deeds.

Though, as a fair warning to would-be villains…animal training and child rearing overlap a lot.


End file.
